It is interesting how they say in one breath it is tuned to each airframe, but then they also tell us the Beast and GeeBee are using the same board and tuning. Makes it hard to seperate the marketing BS from reality. I guess time will tell when people get them hands on and start experimenting.

One thing I guess is the degree of optimization/tuning they mean when they say "optimized/tuned".

As an extreme example, given that different instances of the same model of airframe will differ slightly, to be "really optimized", one would need to tweak the board's stored parameters a bit for each instance of airframe (not to mention servos, flying conditions and pilot).

One thing that they might have done was started with a board parameter set that was good for the Beast (since it was already designed and "set in foam") and then tweaked the GeeBee design a bit (since it was still on the drawing boards) so that it would behave better with that board parameter set.

Remember, those guys only hear what the engineer in the back room tell them, every now and then. They don't attend all the meetings. When they are at shows like IHobby, it's all about the show, not about communication back home and between them...

Still have a month to go... Then, we will really know everything there has to know about those boards!

I am reading this with interest, this stuff looks exciting but I think many expect this to be some sophisticated system with tweaking for different models...comparing it to flybarless systems. In function, maybe, but look at the price of this thing and size, This has to be very rudimentary version. You can't pack too much technology, research... in at this size and price point, though it looks like a very clever little stabilizer.

I am reading this with interest, this stuff looks exciting but I think many expect this to be some sophisticated system with tweaking for different models...comparing it to flybarless systems. In function, maybe, but look at the price of this thing and size, This has to be very rudimentary version. You can't pack too much technology, research... in at this size and price point, though it looks like a very clever little stabilizer.

You most definitely can pack all of the technology of a large heli's flybarless system in there. The mCP X with its flybarless system is proof of that. It has a full-blown flybarless controller integrated into the brick, and the brick only costs $70 USD. It also flies very big - more like a 500 than a UM, and it can handle an amazing amount of wind for its size. It performs every bit as well as the flybarless systems on larger helis. Horizon has already said that they adapted the mCP X's base technology for use in fixed-wing apps, so it is reasonable to believe that the AS3X will also perform well.

Dave, thanks--but what about Expo/DR ? Can I set my personal handling or it is impossible and I have to fly with the AS3X setting ?

Anyway...have you tried to fly the GeeBee prototype without AS3X ? I assume this should be a hard mission

Thanks for your answer and time

Hi,

The system has interactions that change the feel based on various gains and parameters. After the stability is quite tuned, we have the ability to adjust 'travel' and 'expo' in the receiver to a feeling that many pilots will like.

Of course, you can overlay your own preferences (like rates and expo) in your transmitter to customise the feel.

When you see the instructions, you will see that we discourage much trim, as this will start having negative effects, so it is best to mechanicly trim out any significant trim, so the 'electronic' trim is near center.

I did fly the Gee Bee (couple of revs) with AS3X on a switch. With the system off, it was just very uncomfortable to fly. Skidded back and forth... pitchy... fealt like it wanted to bite you all the time. Not plesent.
The reason we won't allow the user to turn it off, is because they don't fly well with it off. The CG's, throws, and various other factors on specific planes are chosen to work with the system on. They fly poorly with the system off. We don't want to risk the customers aircraft. (As a business, we don't want high returns either). Somewhere I did post on a bit of a joke we played on a professional pilot turning the system off while handing it to him, and putting it on when we flew... passing the box... priceless!

David
-------------------------------------------------------
On a different note (general reply to different posts), some have noted some conflicts in the message... There are lots of folks working on these projects, and sometimes changes in direction are not known by all. We did build in the ability to support product with unique software on each plane. Turns out the Gee Bee and Beast could use the same code, so they are common.
I guess there are two choices... we can stay off the forums and just let the official vetted channels communicate, or we can participate, and hope we encounter some understanding if the signals occasionally get crossed... in the end, we are just people trying to provide cool products to our customers.

FWIW, everyone I see posting is in product development (on their own time). I don't see any marketing or support folks on here.

The system has interactions that change the feel based on various gains and parameters. After the stability is quite tuned, we have the ability to adjust 'travel' and 'expo' in the receiver to a feeling that many pilots will like.

Of course, you can overlay your own preferences (like rates and expo) in your transmitter to customise the feel.

When you see the instructions, you will see that we discourage much trim, as this will start having negative effects, so it is best to mechanicly trim out any significant trim, so the 'electronic' trim is near center.

I did fly the Gee Bee (couple of revs) with AS3X on a switch. With the system off, it was just very uncomfortable to fly. Skidded back and forth... pitchy... fealt like it wanted to bite you all the time. Not plesent.
The reason we won't allow the user to turn it off, is because the don't fly well with it off. The CG's, throws, and various other factors on specific planes are chosen to work with the system on. The fly poorly with the system off. We don't want to risk the customers aircraft. (As a business, we don't want high returns either). Somewhere I did post on a bit of a joke we played on a professional pilot turning the system off while handing it to him, and putting it on when we flew... passing the box... priceless!

David
-------------------------------------------------------
On a different note (general reply to different posts), some have noted some conflicts in the message... There are lots of folks working on these projects, and sometimes changes in direction are not known by all. We did build in the ability to support product with unique software on each plane. Turns out the Gee Bee and Beast could use the same code, so they are common.
I guess there are two choices... we can stay off the forums and just let the official vetted channels communicate, or we can participate, and hope we encounter some understanding if the signals occasionally get crossed... end the end, we are just people trying to provide cool products to our customers.

FWIW, everyone I see posting is in product development (on their own time). I don't see any marketing or support folks on here.

Thanks for taking the time to post on here. It's rare to have such direct access to the developers of the aircraft that we fly. I definitely appreciate it.

I had asked some questions in an earlier post, but it has long since been buried. Dave E. answered all but one of my questions. The unanswered question is this:

Many of us fly in the winter. What is the operational temperature range of the AS3X? Also, how does it fare if one initializes it indoors, and then takes the aircraft outdoors when it's, say, +10 F?

If I do that with my larger heli, the tail gyro will drift a bit as it acclimates, so I'm curious as to how this system will behave.

Thanks!

Joel

Hi,
I don't personally have the specific answer. My general experience is like yours... most all of the sensors have some drift in temp, that is not able to be completely canceled out... If the sensor is done as you say, it is likely to suffer some ill effects... which would be avoided if then rebooted after acclimation.

My gut is that the AS3X may be less affected than classic HL arrangements, but I do not have the specific info. If I gather anything, I will try to pass it on.

I've had a lot of fun flying the original Beast over the past year, and I can hardly wait to try the new Beast. I am very much looking forward to flying a micro that handles like its giant-scale counterpart. I have been waiting for this since I was a kid.

Now, I'm waiting and looking forward to the GeeBee...another great plane from the 2S brushless UMX series. You guys are on the right line and make many friends of the microplanes very happy.

Thanks, I need my own also! Our whole team is pretty excited.... Normally in that case... the paying customers are going to like it too. Generally, I have been very pleased with the 'feel' of our software lately in our planes and helis... very natural, very direct. Not 'robotic'. These planes, and also the new mSR X all are pleasing the test pilots.... and our focus IS the pilot experience.

I can see the merits of not allowing the system to be turned off; after all you can't disable it on the Blade MCP X and nobody complains about that. But something they do complain incessantly about is the "twitchy" performance (and resulting crash damage) of the previous generation UM aircraft, such as the UM P-51. If the system does what Horizon claims it will, there would be absolutely no benefit to turning it off. I don't understand what folks who poo-poo it think they'll be gaining by disabling the stabilization. My apologies if I missed this in the 7 pages of posts, but did Horizon have any plans to push AS3X to those "legacy" UM aircraft? I could see the P-51 and Mosquito in particular really benefiting from this technology.